If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

They are talking about Southerners the way they accuse us of talking about blacks. Hypocrite much DUmmies?

See, they are "allowed" to hate southern whites because southern whites are inherently racist, whereas blacks have been systematically oppressed and that makes them a protected class. It's the same thing with white power vs black power, blacks can say black power an it be "empowering" while whites can't say white power because whites have always had the power.

Also, whites are just oppressive, they made the indians walk on the trail of tears, forgetting the fact that the indians were murdering colonials and were warring against each other right next door to the colonies, they made blacks into slaves, even though the african war lords are the ones that enslaved them and sold them for profit much like they do with the arab countries today; dummies love multiculturalism, except for white culture, they think that white people have been so oppressive, historical facts and context be damned, and that the culture of africans( notice how I said africans and not blacks Dummies probably think only black people can be from africa) such as slavery, blood diamond mining, perpetual civil war, and 3rd world standard of living in much of the continent.

Dummies think the only reason why southerners are poor is because they just haven't cashed in their white privilege, and that blacks will always need government to make sure they succeed.

Well, I'm down here taking all sorts of money. Of course I work for it. Where are my freebies? :D

Romney is a jerk.

If you're working for them, then they aren't freebies. Free means that you don't pay for it, somebody else does. You're part of the 53% who's paying for the freebies of the 47%. Romney gets that. Why don't you?

47% of the people can be ignored because they, like you, are going to vote for Obama no matter what. And that's fair because 60% of the people were ignored when Obama, Reid, and Pelosi rammed through a health care bill that 60% of the people didn't want, and 100% of the people hadn't read.

Fair is fair.

Thing is I work for a living. So did my sister before she got laid off. So did my father years ago. So did my grand-mother (never told me her politics, but I assume it leaned Democrat). The idea that we're just a bunch of bums is just a prejudice.

And I wouldn't say I'd vote for Obama no matter what. I'll just say that nearly anytime I've voted Republican, I regretted it later. Can't help what I think.

If you're working for them, then they aren't freebies. Free means that you don't pay for it, somebody else does. You're part of the 53% who's paying for the freebies of the 47%. Romney gets that. Why don't you?

Once again, this goes back to prejudice. Forty-seven percent of this country is not a bunch of lazy bums. You're just being prejudice and so is Romney. Seriously, do you think forty-seven percent of this country is without a job? Are you not reading the news?

I believe in helping others become successful instead of slamming the door behind me. I'd like all the single moms on welfare (most of welfare recipients) to get enough education to get a decent paying job. I would like parents to feel like they don't have to choose between working for wages and their children's healthcare or their healthcare.

I have more than one friend applying for disability because they can't work. It's not that they don't want to work. They were working. It's that they can't work. They're being denied medicaid right now. Because they're still trying to get some income, they can't get private assistance from charities (because they're still considered to be applying for medicaid). These people are in crappy health. NOBODY should be denied healthcare. Yeah, ERs are certainly nice. It would be better if people could get the rehab they need, the medicine they need, and so forth to prevent an ER visit.

People say I should vote for Romney because of abortion. Do people not realize that before this Presidential election, Romney was pro-choice and for gay rights? What on earth makes people think things would be different now? Ryan? The VP doesn't do much. And while I'm talking about Romney's flip flop attitude, I just wanted to remind everybody of his healthcare ideas in MA. He actually used that to demonstrate why he cared about the poor. Really? The healthcare plan which you say you'll repeal on a national level is proof that you care about the poor?

The key to reducing abortion is reducing poverty. That does mean helping people when they're down. It doesn't mean letting them stay on welfare. Our current system doesn't allow that. Five years. That's it. It means helping people when they're down and assisting them with getting the job training they need and the skills to get a job. Most abortions happen with people of poverty. Want to end abortion? End poverty.

Next argument: Obama hasn't brought enough employment.

Fact: Obama tried to get more work in and Republicans wouldn't go for it.

Next argument: Obama will raise your taxes.
Fact: It's been proven that the rich are getting extra tax cuts through loopholes. How can the rich talk about fair taxes when Mitt Romney says it's fair for him to be taxed less? I understand that they're the job creators, but where is his company right now? Not here. Companies should be given tax cuts for keeping their business here in America.

I'm going to the fair. Hope I get some free cheesecake out of rich Republicans.

I didn't address this before. The healthcare plan does not cover abortions on demand. I think it might cover them in cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest. As pointed out by conservatives, that's not the majority of abortions.

Thing is I work for a living. So did my sister before she got laid off. So did my father years ago. So did my grand-mother (never told me her politics, but I assume it leaned Democrat). The idea that we're just a bunch of bums is just a prejudice.

And I wouldn't say I'd vote for Obama no matter what. I'll just say that nearly anytime I've voted Republican, I regretted it later. Can't help what I think.

OK. So your family works. Good for you. I don't mean to say that all Democrats are 47%ers, but I will say that nearly all 47%ers are Democrats.

Speaking for myself, I don't believe that the economy follows the president. I believe - and evidence seems to support me - that the economy follows the legislative branch, which was Republican from 95 till 2001, Democratic from 01 till 03, Republican from 03 till 07, and Democratic since, at least so far as the senate goes.

What can be said in Clinton's favor is that in 1999 few people anticipated the out-of-control growth of the hedge fund industry and the subprime mortgage market.

The culprit, as I see it, is not the president; it's his party. And in the case of the Democrats, I will name Charlie Rangle, Pelosi, Reid, Jesse Jackson, William J Jefferson (now in prison) and a host of other corrupt individuals who are disingenuous to the point of outright fabrication of fairy tales in their expressed concern for the rest of the U S population.
In other words, they don't really give a shit about their constituency, they're just in it for themselves.

Once again, this goes back to prejudice. Forty-seven percent of this country is not a bunch of lazy bums. You're just being prejudice and so is Romney.

Romney didn't say that, and neither did Odysseus.

Originally Posted by Lanie

Seriously, do you think forty-seven percent of this country is without a job? Are you not reading the news?

Neither Romney nor Ody said that, either.

Originally Posted by Lanie

I believe in helping others become successful instead of slamming the door behind me.

So do I and every conservative I know.

Originally Posted by Lanie

I'd like all the single moms on welfare (most of welfare recipients) to get enough education to get a decent paying job.

I'd like that too, but I would really prefer that they not become single moms in the first place, and whether anyone likes it or not, it's an undeniable fact that the single mom bears half of the responsibility for becoming a single mom in the first place in most cases.

Originally Posted by Lanie

I would like parents to feel like they don't have to choose between working for wages and their children's healthcare or their healthcare.

That doesn't even make sense.

Originally Posted by Lanie

I have more than one friend applying for disability because they can't work. It's not that they don't want to work. They were working. It's that they can't work. They're being denied medicaid right now. Because they're still trying to get some income, they can't get private assistance from charities (because they're still considered to be applying for medicaid). These people are in crappy health. NOBODY should be denied healthcare. Yeah, ERs are certainly nice. It would be better if people could get the rehab they need, the medicine they need, and so forth to prevent an ER visit.

That was a nice rant, but not really relevant here. If this was supposed to be about disabled people being part of the 47%, then:

Not all, or even most, people who are disabled are people who are going to vote for the Democrat who promises them more free stuff; IOW, the disabled are not representative of the 47%, and besides;

even if the disabled 100% were people who would vote for the Democrat no matter what in order to get freebies, they are such a tiny sliver of the population as to be inconsequential. When was the last time that you heard about the all-important wheelchair voting bloc? Overall, the disabled (meaning either people who have some mental disturbance or those who are in a wheelchair or those who have some physical malady that prevents them from working or prevents them from full employment) is about 3% of the population as a whole.

I'm not really quite sure why. You said yourself that you regretted your vote for Obama last time. Why you would want to do that again is beyond me.

Originally Posted by Lanie

People say I should vote for Romney because of abortion.

Who are these people?

Originally Posted by Lanie

Do people not realize that before this Presidential election, Romney was pro-choice and for gay rights?

Most people who care do, yes.

Originally Posted by Lanie

What on earth makes people think things would be different now?

People have changes of mind from time to time, you know. I was once firmly pro-abortion. Regardless, it continues to be a non-issue for this election but for the Democrats' desperation of throwing it out there.

Originally Posted by Lanie

Ryan? The VP doesn't do much.

Tell Dick Cheney.

The VP often has a strong hand in shaping policy, albeit usually pretty invisibly.

Originally Posted by Lanie

And while I'm talking about Romney's flip flop attitude, I just wanted to remind everybody of his healthcare ideas in MA. He actually used that to demonstrate why he cared about the poor. Really? The healthcare plan which you say you'll repeal on a national level is proof that you care about the poor?

You do understand the difference between states and the federal government, right?

Originally Posted by Lanie

The key to reducing abortion is reducing poverty.

Rubbish. Rich people get abortions, too. The key to reducing abortions is to stop pretending that sex should never have consequences. That starts with not allowing and indeed encouraging sex that is allegedly without consequences.

Originally Posted by Lanie

That does mean helping people when they're down. It doesn't mean letting them stay on welfare. Our current system doesn't allow that. Five years. That's it. It means helping people when they're down and assisting them with getting the job training they need and the skills to get a job. Most abortions happen with people of poverty.

Twenty-seven percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes between 100–199% of the federal

That second figure? That's exactly on target with the age demographic of those who get the most abortions:

Women in their 20s account for more than half of all abortions; women aged 20–24 obtain 33% of all abortions, and women aged 25–29 obtain 24%.

Guess what: MOST people in their twenties are earning something between 100% and 199% of the federal poverty guidelines. Relatively few people come out of high school or college and immediately start earning $50,000 salaries. The federal poverty guideline is $11,170 for a single person household, so twice that is $22,340, or a wage of about $10.75/hour. Not a lot of people just starting out in life start out with that kind of wage or salary.

Originally Posted by Lanie

Want to end abortion? End poverty.

Ludicrous. There is no demonstrated causality between poverty and abortion; indeed, there isn't even a correlation.

Originally Posted by Lanie

Next argument: Obama hasn't brought enough employment.

Actually, he has actively worked against employment.

Originally Posted by Lanie

Fact: Obama tried to get more work in and Republicans wouldn't go for it.

Wrong. Employment does not come about by legislative fiat or dictate. It also does not come about by executive fiat or dictate. What both branches can (and should) do is stay the hell out of the way of private enterprise so that they, who are the only ones who actually can create employment, can feel comfortable about creating employment.

Originally Posted by Lanie

Next argument: Obama will raise your taxes.

Actually, he already has, but he plans to raise them more.

Originally Posted by Lanie

Fact: It's been proven that the rich are getting extra tax cuts through loopholes. How can the rich talk about fair taxes when Mitt Romney says it's fair for him to be taxed less?

How nicely you're ignoring the part where he says that lowering those tax rates goes hand-in-hand with getting rid of those loopholes.

Originally Posted by Lanie

I understand that they're the job creators, but where is his company right now? Not here.

What? WTF are you talking about?

Originally Posted by Lanie

Companies should be given tax cuts for keeping their business here in America.

That's a nice feel-good argument, and perhaps a valid one economically. Make your case economically. Use math. In the process, demonstrate why Florida should be spending taxpayer money to protect potato-growers' jobs while Idaho spends taxpayer money to protect orange-growers' jobs.

Originally Posted by Lanie

I'm going to the fair. Hope I get some free cheesecake out of rich Republicans.

I hope Lanie formats her reply as eloquently. If she does, it will probably take her about three weeks. LMAO.

You're saying I can't write? Sheesh.

It mostly depends on whether I want to debate. I like to discuss, but debating makes me feel like I'm banging my head up against the wall. A discussion between Adam and I is usually about my bringing up my points and him saying you're wrong wrong wrong, not even considering my side of things very much. It's been very frustrating (not just with him, but others as well). I'll look at his post and see.